On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> In v10 we might need to go with a solution like what you've sketched >>> here, because Tom will complain about breaking binary compatibility >>> with EState (and maybe other PlanState nodes) in a released branch. > > Here's a pair of versions of that patch tidied up a bit, for > REL_10_STABLE and master. Unfortunately I've been unable to come up > with a reproducer that shows misbehaviour (something like what was > reported on -bugs[1] which appears to be a case of calling > dsa_get_address(wrong_area, some_dsa_pointer)). >
+ EState *estate = gatherstate->ps.state; + + /* Install our DSA area while executing the plan. */ + estate->es_query_dsa = gatherstate->pei->area; outerTupleSlot = ExecProcNode(outerPlan); + estate->es_query_dsa = NULL; Won't the above coding pattern create a problem, if ExecProcNode throws an error and outer block catches it and continues execution (consider the case of execution inside PL blocks)? -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
